Being appointed, however, by the will of the Lord, a minister and elder

in His Church, I cannot abstain from the exercise of that employment

without entailing upon myself God's anger, and committing a culpable

desertion of duty. My ministry is consecrated to the Church of Jesus

Christ, and I am deeply impressed with the obligation of fulfilling

my vocation. "The Pastor and Bishop of souls" gives me both the

command and the strength to discharge my duties. The Church, which is

the people, calls me to serve it. I must be faithful to my ministry,

rendering a good account of the charge entrusted to me.

I have been bidden to keep in remembrance "that true faith which is

in me," and "to keep alive that gift of God which is in me by the

imposition of hands," seeing that God "has not given us a spirit of

fear," but of strength, and of love, and of a sound mind. Therefore,

"I must not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord." "I know in whom

I have believed, and I am persuaded that He is able to keep that which

I have committed unto Him against that day." I therefore "keep the

form of sound words which I have heard, in faith and love which is in

Christ Jesus." "I keep that good thing, which was committed unto me

by the Holy Ghost, which dwelleth in me." I profess before God and

the Lord Jesus Christ "to preach the Word, to be instant in season

and out of season, to reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering

and doctrine." I purpose to be vigilant in everything, "to endure

afflictions, to do the work of an evangelist, to make full proof of my

ministry."

Such being my office, such my obligations, here I stand before you,

Holy Father, "studying to show myself approved of God, a workman not

needing to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth." I know

that the elders who have performed well the duty of ruling should be

"reputed worthy of double honour; especially those who labour in the

Word and in doctrine." You are the elder to whom was recently committed

the charge of ruling over the Church of our country; and this charge

was committed to you by other elders, who divide amongst them the

various offices of that Church, or who are called to preside over other

Churches. You the overseer, or bishop, of the Church of Rome, took upon

you the heavy responsibility of feeding that portion of the flock of

Christ, and of strengthening your brethren with good example and holy

doctrine; your brethren, who look to you for counsel and direction, and

depend in a certain degree on you, regarding you as an elder brother,

whose judgment and prudence may aid their timidity and weakness. On

you, therefore, it devolves to propose to them that which is of God and

of the Lord Jesus Christ, and which tends to the welfare of His Church.

You it behoves to restore the truths of religion to their primitive

purity; to take away every extraneous admixture; to separate the good

wheat from the tares, in order to give to the Christian people the

nourishment of faith and of salvation. Your brethren look up to you

in this matter, which ought to be conducted with harmony, in order

to preserve the union of the Christian Churches: and although each

possesses over his own Church an equal authority, they nevertheless

hesitate to act without you; they expect you to set this work in

motion, and to be their model in the reformation of doctrine.

Yes, Holy Father, the reformation of doctrine is the serious business

to which you and your brethren are called by the people to turn your

earnest attention; for it is well known to all Christians, that upon

the purity and holiness of the doctrines of the Church depend the

purity and holiness of the actions of believers. Now, the doctrines

which proceed from man are neither pure nor holy; seeing that "God hath

concluded them all in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon all."

Therefore, none but the doctrines of God are the truth in religion; all

others are lies.

Think you, then, that those are doctrines of God, which are not

contained in His Book, but are opposed to the sacred precepts of His

holy Word? Have you ever compared the doctrines taught in primitive

times with those of later ages? Have you ever compared the dogmas of

the Decretals with the doctrines of the Bible? I have compared them,

and have shuddered in amazement, that so many strange novelties,

amounting to an actual renunciation of the ancient faith, the

pure creed of our fathers, should ever have been introduced into

Christianity.

Strip yourself, then, of that fatal prepossession that your

predecessors were holy and infallible. Examine carefully the sources

of the existing belief. Observe what is from God, and what proceeds

from man. Man has erred in presuming to legislate in the things of

God. Not only singly, but in the aggregate, men have erred. The Divine

assistance was no doubt promised, but it was for preserving the ancient

doctrines, not for framing new ones; the Holy Spirit is with those

who believe in the ancient Scriptures, but not with those who tamper

with the Divine Word. In the middle ages the ministers of the Catholic

Church revelled in innovation, and from that time the desire for change

has grown upon them to such a degree, that primitive Christianity can

no longer be recognised.

Think you that it was ever permitted to men to add their ideas and

thoughts to the ideas and thoughts of God, or to take anything away

from the Divine Book? Are you not rather persuaded with me that

whosoever does this, on him are denounced the chastisements of God, as

it is written in the last verse of the Divine Revelation--"God shall

take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city,

and from the things which are written in this book?" To add to the

meaning, or to change it! to overturn, on certain points, the entire

system and spirit of the Divine Legislator! I ask you, who were an

elder before me, and a ruler among the elders, are such things to be

endured? However ancient these errors may be, however concealed by some

or acquiesced in by others, shall prescription prevail to this extent?

No! not any antiquity can establish the abuses of religion; and even

if the whole world were combined to maintain error (supposing such a

thing were possible), even that would not hinder its destruction by any

single person who had with him the Word of Truth.

This, then, is the point at issue;--the abuses of Rome have existed

long, and obtained for a long time the support of the multitude; do

they for that reason cease to be abuses? Her errors have been adopted,

applauded, followed; do they on that account cease to be errors? And

must not abuses and errors be reformed wheresoever they may be found,

or however long they may have existed?

But with whom does it rest to effect a reform in matters of religion?

Who is to promote it, and by what means? I reply: first, the bishops;

then, the elders; afterwards, all who have a zeal for religion. The

instrument of reformation is simple; viz. the Word of God as it stands

written in the Sacred Scriptures, pure as our forefathers received

it, powerful in itself to change the face of the whole universe. The

truths of that inspired volume constitute the whole of Christianity;

out of it there exists no truth for the Church. Be it yours, then, with

the Holy Bible in your hand, to reform the doctrine corrupted by your

predecessors! No one can do this work so well as you; no one so much as

you is bound to do it by conscience and by special obligation.

Let this consideration sink deep into your mind, how sad is the present

state of religion in Italy, that country with which you are most

closely connected! Where, now, can be found among us that holiness

of faith, whence alone proceeds holiness of works? When we look for

Christianity, what do we see around us? Infidelity or superstition.

Infidelity in all those classes who call themselves enlightened;

superstition in all those who follow the teaching of your priests. On

the one hand, are men who have cast off all belief, and have rejected

Christianity with popery. Seeing that both Gospel and Canons have come

to them through the same hands, they have concluded that both must be

lies; that both being preached to them with the same fervour, nay, the

Canons sometimes exalted above the Gospel, both have been contrived

only to shackle consciences, to degrade the spirit of man, to subjugate

the people to the rule of an individual, who has had, in all ages, an

insatiable appetite for power! Thus, not distinguishing the work of man

from pure Christianity, which is the work of God, they have rejected

everything alike, and live the life of infidels. On the other hand,

we behold men who receive implicitly all that is taught them--to whom

all is gold which is sold by the priests--to whom all is sacred which

has any show of religion or piety--men who, not caring for faith, seek

only for good works; and, thinking little or nothing about God and

Jesus Christ, run after saints and the Virgin,--relics, images, and

indulgences!

These two classes, generally speaking, comprise all the Christianity

of Italy; and to this unsoundness is to be referred the reigning

immorality, the want of energy of mind, the absence of virtue and of

union among our citizens. "The Church which divides the races within

our country" was the great subject of lamentation to that immortal

genius, who, three centuries ago, on the banks of the Arno, revealed to

the world the wickedness of princes. "The Church which demoralizes the

people" with its doctrines even more than with its practices, is the

lamentation which I, a son of Italy, a minister of the Italian people,

raise aloud to heaven; and which, with all the strength that is in me,

I would echo in the ears of all good men who love our country. Yes!

from the Church, or rather from those who call themselves the Church,

proceeds all that series of evils which degrades our beautiful land,

and lowers our finely gifted people in the eyes of the stranger. Nor

will I ever cease to lift up my voice, until, in this respect more

than any other, our beloved Italy shall be seen reforming herself, and

returning gloriously to holiness of faith, purity of morals, and mutual

love among our citizens.

And you, Holy Father; are not you, like me, an Italian? do not you,

like me, feel burning within you the sacred love of country--"_la dolce

carità del natio loco_?" Oh! I will not so wrong you as to suppose you

now destitute of a sentiment which has hitherto distinguished you; a

sentiment which ought rather to grow stronger in your mind, now that,

as bishop of the most ancient of cities, you occupy the most glorious

of thrones. To you the applauding people ascribe a generous liberality;

from you are expected good laws, and ameliorations in the difficult

details of government. From you they hope to receive that in which they

would receive everything--which by a single act you have the power to

give them--a religious reformation. Whoever thinks correctly knows

that on this point depend social improvement, public prosperity,--in

a word, every good thing which, by the favour of Divine Providence,

citizens are capable of enjoying. Without this, we shall always remain

in wretchedness, unhappiness, disunion. Without this, there will never

be contentment, nor any tranquillity among the people. The spirit of

restless change will continue to agitate them--to their own injury, it

is true, but also to the destruction of yourself, and of others who are

their princes.

Let us then have reform in the Church; but what reform, and in what

particulars? Must I repeat it? Remove everything invented by popes,

decreed by popes, designed for the interest of popes. All this is

popery, not Christianity; and we are resolved to be henceforth

Christians, not papists. The reformation will be complete, when once

the sentence is uttered, "The Bible, and nothing but the Bible."

For instance, that you, Pius, should be Bishop of Rome, is not contrary

to the Bible. But _this_ is contrary to it, that you should assume a

bishopric over those sees which have already another bishop; for all

bishops are equal; each one the pastor of his own flock, and each

independent of the other. For my part, you should have my vote to be

bishop of _all_ Italy, were _all_ the other bishops removed; but you

cannot rightfully co-exist. That elders, too, should exist, is in

accordance with the Bible--and you may call them priests, if you will;

but as for friars, they are contrary to the Bible; their vows are

repugnant to the Gospel and to nature, whatever your theologians may

say of them; and their ministry useless, at least, if not hurtful, to

the Church.

What, again, do we mean by the Church? You know well that in the Word

of God it means the Christian people. It is contrary then to the Bible

for the Church to mean the priests only. Let it please you, Holy

Father, to consider well, for a moment, this point, which is at present

of the highest importance. Do you believe that what has been usurped

should be restored? Let it, then, be by your means that the people

resume their ancient rights, and repossess the Church according to

their right. But what Church will you restore to the people of Italy?

The Latin? But where is now the Latin people, or the Latin language?

Do you not perceive what a scourge God sent you, when the priests of

Rome wished to appropriate the Church to themselves, and to make it

their private property; declaring themselves princes and governors, and

the people subjects and slaves to the Church of the priests? It was a

chastisement not unlike that which God sent in the valley of Shinar,

when daring men set themselves to build the famous tower which was to

reach to heaven. Audacious priests, in the thirteenth century, also

attempted to raise themselves into a spiritual power, intending to hold

the people for ever in subjection. But God sent among them by degrees

the spirit of confusion, rendering their language unintelligible to the

people, so that people and priests were compelled to separate. With the

priests remained the ancient language, in which they had dictated laws

at variance with the Gospel; and, sometimes in Christ's name, sometimes

in the name of Moses, had oppressed, burned, tortured the people; a

language associated with crimes which daily mounted up to the throne of

the Omnipotent, provoking the infliction of condign punishment,--such

crimes as prayers addressed in the temple to saints instead of to God;

the Word of Truth exchanged for fables; and Christian teaching founded

no longer on the ancient doctrine of the Bible, but on the new doctrine

of the Canons. The whole language of Catholicism, having become

exclusively Romish, had adulterated the things of God, the doctrines

and maxims of the religion of Jesus Christ.

So grievous a scandal drew down upon Rome the anger of the Eternal, who

seemed, as it were, to repeat the ancient words, "Let us go down, and

there confound their language." That beautiful idiom, which originating

in Latium among the descendants of Romulus, grew with the greatness

of ancient Rome, the language of Virgil and of Tully, became confused

and lifeless; and Rome, the new Babel, beheld issuing from her bosom

and growing up at once, a generation of sons who understood not the

language of their fathers. The Church of the priests felt the heavy

blow which came upon it from heaven; but, instead of weeping and

humbling herself before God--instead of repenting, and correcting her

faults, she persisted in her error, and launched her anathemas against

the people; declaring, like the haughty synagogue of old, that it was

enough for her to comprehend herself,--as for the people, if they did

not understand her language, so much the worse for them!

What followed? People and priests were divided. The Church and the

nation became separated for ever; the Church and the priests called

themselves Latin, while the nation and the people called themselves

Italians. This is a great fact which has not hitherto been sufficiently

regarded. The people, ever under subjection to the tyranny of the

priesthood, had not the spirit to resist oppression, scarcely even to

open their eyes to look upon the chains it had imposed upon them. In

the meantime, the priests laboured to impress them with a belief that

such was their natural condition. Slaves by the will of the strong,

they were taught to believe themselves so by the fatality of nature,

and the will of God.

But enough! The eyes of the people are shut no longer. They have opened

them; they have beheld their chains. Like a lion they have burst

through them. They threaten their former oppressors with a look that

may well make them tremble. Their roaring was like the waking up of

nature, indicating a grand change in the face of the world. The people

have declared that the times are gone by when they would submit to be

badly governed by their pretended masters; and that they are now the

arbiters in their own affairs. We priests are specially bound to do

justice to the people; for to us, more than to others, has their cause

been confided. Be it ours, then, to enlighten them; which is the first

thing they need. Be it ours to assist and protect them, with that holy

ægis which they themselves have confided to us. Let us unite with

them in the true religion of our forefathers. When God extinguished

our Latin language, he meant thereby to punish us priests, and not

the people. Let us submit to that punishment. The Latin language has

corrupted the truths of the Catholic Church, and, therefore, God has

extinguished it. Let our Church rise again in the Italian language,

and let this be the ancient Church of apostolic times. Anathema to

the Church of the middle ages! Thus, alone, can we priests become

again united to the people; thus, alone, can we recover the Church.

For--once more let it be said--the Church means the people; bishops

and priests being only the ministers of the people. It is not in the

nature of things that the language of the Church should be other than

the language of the people. Italian is our language, and Italian must

necessarily be that of our Church.

This Church it is which I desire to serve as a minister. Will not you,

Holy Father, serve it as bishop? Gladly would I then return to you;

and with me many who are now alienated from you would gladly return.

Thenceforth they will have no cause to separate from the Church, for

Jesus Christ will truly reign in it, and with Him will reign union,

peace, concord, charity. Oh, what a sight were this! "How good and how

pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!" Thus united

in the Italian Church, we should remove everything which separates

us from other Christian Churches. Germany, England, Switzerland--all

other countries at present divided from the communion of Rome, would be

again united with us in one faith. Nations would be drawn together in

the bonds of brotherhood. And you, Holy Father, would be the blessed

instrument by which would be realized the Divine prophecy, "There shall

be one fold and one Shepherd."

"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the

fellowship of the Holy Ghost, be with us all. Amen."

MALTA, 1846.

EDICT.

(Vide p. 74.)

_We_, FR. VINCENZO SALVA, _of the Order of Dominicans, Master in

Theology, Inquisitor General of the Holy Office of Ancona, Sinigaglia,

Jesi, Osimo, &c._

IT having been determined fully to re-establish the disciplinary laws

relative to the Jews living in our jurisdiction, and which we have

hitherto in vain endeavoured both by entreaty and exhortation to carry

out in the several ghettos of Ancona and Sinigaglia; we, authorized

by the venerated despatch from the Holy Inquisition of Rome, dated

10th June, 1843, in which we are expressly enjoined and commanded

to enforce the observance of the Pontifical Decrees and Ordinances,

especially with respect to Christian nurses and servants, and the sale

of possessions, either in the city or in the country, whether bought

and held before the year 1827, or after that period,--we ordain as

follows:--

1.--That at the expiration of two months from the present period, all

Christians, male or female, employed as servants in the Ghetto, either

by day or night, are to be discharged, and the Jews are expressly

prohibited to employ in future any Christian whatsoever in domestic

affairs, under pain of such fine as the Pontifical Decrees have

appointed.

2.--That every Jew possessing real property of any kind whatsoever,

or any annuity or mortgage, shall, within three months from the

present date, dispose of the same by an actual _bonâ fide_ sale; at

the expiration of which term, if the order be not complied with, the

Inquisition shall cause the property to be peremptorily disposed of by

public auction.

3.--That no Jew, much less any Jewish family, shall inhabit or carry

on business in any town or village where there is no Ghetto; and such

as are at present acting in contradiction to this law, are hereby

commanded to enter into their respective Ghettos, within the period of

three months, or they will be prosecuted accordingly.

4.--That no Jew shall be permitted, more especially in towns where

there is a Ghetto, to _sit at table and eat with Christians_, in any

eating-house or tavern.

5.--That no Jew shall sleep out of his Ghetto, nor enter any

Christian's house for familiar conversation.

6.--That no Jew be allowed, under any pretence whatever, to induce

Christians to pass a night in the Ghetto, more especially women.

7.--That no Jew shall employ as day-workers, any Christian men or

women, in their houses in the Ghetto.

8.--That no Jew, male or female, shall be allowed to frequent the

houses of Christians, or _enter into friendship_ with them.

9.--That the law which prohibits the Jews to travel about the State

without a licence, shall remain in full force.

10.--That the Jews are expressly forbidden to traffic in church

ornaments, or in books of any description, or to buy, read, or keep

any prohibited book whatsoever, under penalty of a fine of one hundred

crowns, or _seven years_ of imprisonment. And in case any Jew, already

possessing such, neglects to bring them to the Tribunal of the Holy

Office, he will be liable to the same penalties.

11.--That the Jews in the removal of their dead bodies shall not

be allowed to use any _ceremonial rite_, or public display; more

especially are they enjoined to _abstain from all singing of psalms_,

and carrying of lights through the streets, or out of the Ghetto,

under penalty of a fine of one hundred crowns, the forfeiture of

their lights, and corporal punishment to be inflicted on the _nearest

relatives of the defunct_.

Any person infringing these laws and regulations will be subject to the

penalties and fines imposed by the Holy Office. And that no one may

plead ignorance of their existence, it is hereby ordered that a copy of

the present Edict be published, and fixed up in the synagogue, which

shall be deemed equivalent to serving it personally on every separate

Jewish individual, as well on those in Ancona, as on such as may reside

in other places belonging to the same Ghetto.

Given at Ancona, from the Holy Office,

this 24th day of June, 1843.

Fº. FR. VIN. SALVA, Inquisitor General.

* * * * *

The above Edict, published in the year 1843, and authorized by Rome,

is a sufficient answer to those who pretend that the Inquisition is no

longer what it was three centuries ago. We have here the decree of the

very essence of the Roman Court, composing the Holy Office--fifteen

Cardinals, thirty Councillors, &c. &c., with the Pope at their head.

We are returned to those delightful times in which the Neapolitan,

Caraffa, better known as Paul IV., and Michael Ghisler, called Pius V.,

lighted their funeral piles, and inflicted their tortures; and when,

not to be behindhand with his predecessors, the monk Felice Peretti,

called Sixtus V., proclaimed a crusade against the poor Israelites. O

glorious days, when the holy indignation of Rome was responded to by

the ferocious bigotry of Spain, the religious fury of France, and the

papal fanatics throughout Italy!

Who is there that would not delight to see those good old times

restored, when Christian men enjoyed the pleasing spectacle of the

public burning of fifty thousand Moors, by Ferdinand and Isabella of

pious memory, and as many Jews consigned to the flames alive, through

the various countries of Europe? Who would not wish to act over again

the famous day of St. Bartholomew, and a hundred other deeds more

or less celebrated, but all testifying the zeal of the holy Roman

Inquisition?

And what is the reason why these spectacles, so _creditable_ to the

human race, are no longer to be witnessed in these days? Is it that

the people are no longer instigated by that species of devotion which

rendered the burning of their fellow-creatures alive, on account of

their difference in religious opinions, a matter of such consolation

and enjoyment? The zeal of the Romish Church remains the same, and our

popes have not lost their holy desire for the conversion of the whole

world by fire and sword to their sacred doctrines. How is it then that

these glorious days do not return?

Let us, however, confine our remarks to the present Edict, in which the

Inquisitor equally shows his profound knowledge of jurisprudence and

of morality. The Jews are spoken of as being under his jurisdiction;

but I cannot understand whether this jurisdiction be political or

religious. The first he has nothing to do with, as his authority is

purely ecclesiastical; and as to the second, I would ask, what right

has he to exercise it upon persons of a different religion? It is idle

to say that the Pope has conferred it upon him, since he himself has no

right over such as are not baptized. To usurp any authority whatsoever,

is a crime, in the eye of the law of every nation. The Inquisitor is

consequently either extremely ignorant, or most daringly presumptuous

thus to defy a principle acknowledged and submitted to by all civilized

people.

He says that he has hitherto in vain implored that the laws of

discipline relative to the Jews should be maintained in full force, and

therefore takes occasion to issue anew a mandatory Edict. Surely those

who call themselves Masters in Theology, ought at least to understand

common honesty. Could laws be considered as conscientiously binding

which were the result of sheer hatred towards an unoffending community?

And were not the subjects of it justified in evading them as much as

possible?

As to the 1st article, that all Christians are to be dismissed from the

service of Jews, what can be more arbitrary and unjust? The Inquisitor

would have done better to have laid his interdict upon the Christians,

in forbidding them to go to the Jews, rather than to compel the latter

to shut their doors in their faces. And, concerning these very Jews in

your own jurisdiction, Mr. Inquisitor General, you know how charitable

they have always been; you know what service they rendered us in the

time of the cholera; how, in this very city, they assisted the poor,

and condoled with them under their sufferings; and how charitable they

showed themselves on every occasion.

Before, then, you forbid the Jews to employ Christian servants, tell

those who are in want of bread to seek it at your convents, at the

doors of the Inquisition.

As to the 2d article, touching the disposal of the property of these

people, what can be said in its justification? Whether they retain it

or not, I suppose they are equally liable to be called upon for the

government taxes. There is one of this race, however, who must be a sad

trouble to you; one who has lately possessed himself of an enormous

extent of property, and has claims upon the very estates of the Church,

even to the palaces of the Pope, the prebendaries of the Cardinals,

the revenue of the bishops, and the whole body of the clergy, friars,

nuns and all, which are absolutely mortgaged to him, to the extent of

many millions. Now, is it an agreeable thing, O Father Inquisitor, that

this great Jew, this powerful Baron Rothschild, should be invested with

such awful authority, as to be legally justified in driving the Pope

from the Vatican, should Cardinals Tosti and Lambruschini be behindhand

in their accounts? This wealthy baron is, in fact, master of half

the Pontifical State; and if things go on at the same rate, _super

Cathedram Petri sedebunt Israelitæ_. What remedy will you propose,

my dear Inquisitor, if, on the Pope's neglecting to pay, this Jew,

Rothschild, seizes on the church-property? You threaten the poor Jews

of Ancona with forced sales, but the Baron may put the whole of you up

to auction at once.

If this article was designed to evade such a catastrophe, I doubt if

it would be of any avail. Rothschild is too well supported to have

his rights invaded even by the Holy Roman Inquisition. This unjust

attack is indeed altogether as unwarrantable as it is impolitic. What

would you say if the Grand Sultan were to issue a decree that all the

Catholics in his dominions should be constrained to sell, within three

months, whatever property they might possess, merely because they

were Catholics? Yet you set him and others an example of this crying

injustice, for no more defensible reason.

The 3d article savours strongly of the monk. To oblige all the

descendants of Israel to live cooped up in their Ghetto, as in a

monastery. Perhaps you feared that the Christians might turn Jews,

if free intercourse were permitted between them; or do you rather

apprehend that the Jews might become Christians? Rarely does the former

take place. It is the latter, then, that you dread, for you know very

well that the Jews profit the Inquisition far more than the Christians.

The real object of this law, therefore, must be to estrange the two

parties, and to sow enmity and dislike between them, so as to cause

them to live in perpetual vexation, and discord, and distrust.

The 4th is a singular article,--that no Jew shall be allowed to eat

at the same table with a Christian, or in any public eating-house or

tavern out of the Ghetto. It would be well if every one could make it

convenient to take his meals at home; but when, from the nature of

a person's occupation, or any other cause, this cannot be the case,

what is he to do? To the _trattoria_, or eating-house, every one is

admitted; there is no distinction made there between the Jew or the

Turk, the Christian or the Heathen. The noble sits by the side of the

plebeian. He is the most respected who spends the most; he is the best

served who pays the highest. Every one is admitted, even the thief and

the assassin. The Jew alone is to be forbidden! But what a disgrace

it is to prohibit the Jew from eating in company with the Christian,

when Christ himself, the Divine Head of our Church, sat at meat with

the children of Israel, even with the Samaritan and the Sadducee, and

imparted to them the benefit of His instruction.

How shall we in future have the courage to persuade these people that

we are partakers of that most holy religion which began with Adam, and

had the Jews for its early fathers? How, in proof of our assertion,

present to them the code which is contained in the books of Moses and

the Prophets, by us, as well as by them, believed and reverenced? With

what face can we boast to them of our Gospel as abounding in precepts

full of peace and love? Will they not reply to us by pointing to the

laws of the Roman Inquisition, the famous Edict of Ancona, where all

is division and hatred? Are you a preacher, brother Salva, and is

such your doctrine? To be consistent, you ought to begin your sermon

with the duty of religious intolerance, evangelical persecution, and

Christian cruelty. Speak the same language in your pulpit as you do

in your Edict, and observe the good effect it will produce upon your

audience.

Your 5th article prohibits the Jew from sleeping out of his quarters,

and from any friendly intercourse with Christians. Well done! So the

Jew is for ever to remain a Jew, and avoid all opportunities of

being converted; he is to forego any advantage he might derive from

conversing with us. But perhaps you imagine the race to be so bad that

good Christians might be injured in communicating with them; indeed

your Edict treats them as such throughout. But whoever consults the

calendars of our tribunals will find that in all our towns there are

very few Jews who figure in the list of criminals; a sufficient proof

of their regularity of conduct, their obedience to the laws, and their

respect for the authorities.

In the 6th, it is stated that no Jew shall allow any Christian man,

much less any Christian woman, to sleep in the Ghetto. The inuendo

here conveyed might not inappropriately be retorted upon the friars,

notwithstanding the closed gates of their monasteries. They may thank

the Jews for not publishing the story of a certain Vicar of the Holy

Office, who frequently, under cover of the darkness of night, was

accustomed to find his way into the Ghetto, certainly not for the

purpose of preaching morality to its inmates. I should advise you,

then, Father Inquisitor, not to be over curious in your researches,

when there is need of so much indulgence in your own proceedings.

The 7th is a very extraordinary prohibition, forbidding any Jew to

employ a Christian as a day-labourer in his house in the Ghetto.

So that they are not allowed to have the services of bricklayer,

carpenter, or builder, all of whom work by the day, and it is well

known that the Jews themselves do not exercise these employments. This

law, in fact, was made to oblige the Jew every time his house required

repairing, to go to the Inquisition, with all due reverence and

respect, and _not empty handed_, to get leave to have his work done,

without which he is liable to a heavy fine.

In the 8th, the Jews are forbidden to contract any friendship with

Christians. For charity's sake, poor children of Israel, pay no

attention to such nonsense. Be as good friends with us as you can.

We esteem you as our fellow-citizens, notwithstanding our difference of

religion; we regard you as brothers, since we both call God our Father,

and both of us ascribe honour and glory to Him.

The 9th article relates to a licence with which every Jew must provide

himself, before he can be allowed to travel about the State--a licence

which the Inquisitor alone can grant--which must be referred to the

decision of the bishops and vicars; and the infringement of any of the

rules it contains, subjects the offender to arbitrary punishment,

besides imprisonment and a fine of three hundred crowns. In this

licence it is forbidden to dwell with, or to enter into familiar

conversation with Christians. Now it is only in a very few of the towns

in the Roman States, that a Ghetto is to be found. It follows then,

that as their business leads the Jews to visit places where there is

not any, they are obliged, in that case, according to the conditions of

their licence, to live with their beasts, in their stables.

The 10th prohibits the Jews from dealing in church ornaments, and

in books of every description. This is of no great consequence as

respects the future; but in the meanwhile what is to be done with such

of these forbidden articles as they may already have in their shops?

they must make a present of them to the Inquisitor, for it appears that

unless they do so, there is a fine of three hundred crowns to pay, and

imprisonment to undergo.

As an appendix to this new decalogue which is directed against the

living, the Inquisitor has thought proper to add an order or two

respecting the dead; forbidding the Jews, in burying them, to make use

of any ceremony or rite, or to carry any lights with their funeral

processions, or _to sing psalms_. What, does your anger then extend

even to the dead? are they too to be punished? Would your canon laws

prohibit the decent performance of those last sad offices which are

held sacred by all nations, respected by all classes of people? Every

religion has its form of worship, every form of worship its peculiar

rites, every rite a proper ceremonial form. These things, although

extrinsic, and not strictly essential, are nevertheless established by

custom, and observed with befitting reverence. Can you deny that the

Jews have a right to practise their own religious observances? He that

is born a Jew and remains one, must die and be buried as a Jew. How can

you, then, prohibit the necessary ceremony at their funerals? You keep

them among you, and allow them the exercise of their religion. Their

dead have a claim to sepulchral rites, which can only be performed

in the manner their own religion prescribes. The Catholics, the

Protestants, the Greeks, and the Armenians, the Arabs, and the Chinese,

have each of them, according to their peculiar views, established their

funeral ceremonies, which, however imposing they may be to those of

their own creed, may appear trivial and insignificant in the eyes of

others. Nevertheless they are not to be despised, any more than their

religion itself, although neither understood nor approved by others.

But to forbid these children of Israel to sing the Psalms of David!

their own prophet-king! Good heavens! And you yourselves recite these

very prayers in your own sepulchral ceremonies! What greater right have

you to them, composed as they are by a Jewish monarch, than the Jews

themselves have? They, moreover, recite them in the language of King

David himself, in their original Hebrew, a language full of harmony

and pathos and lofty meanings; whereas you declaim them in a barbarous

dialect, which you call Latin, but which in reality has nothing of the

graces of Latium: the version is badly translated, too, incorrect, and

every way imperfect.

According to your ideas, then, not only the Jews are forbidden to

honour their dead, but the Greeks also, although Christians; since, in

this country, their rites and ceremonies are prohibited, and all, in

short, who dissent from the canons of the Vatican, and attribute no

authority to the Inquisition. You alone are at liberty in this respect,

you alone are entitled to the benefit of prayers and spiritual song,

since in you alone are to be found faith, holiness, and salvation!

In the meanwhile look at the tolerance that prevails throughout the

rest of Europe. But could you with any justice complain if you were

yourselves treated as you treat others? Is it fair, that in Greece, in

Russia, in the Ionian Islands there should be Romish churches, Romish

worship, Romish processions, and other public ceremonies, whilst, in

the Roman States, the Greek Church, its rites and ceremonies, are not

permitted? Equally might the Romish Church be banished from England,

because in the Pontifical States the Anglican Church is prohibited.

But the forbearance of others increases your insolence; their kindness

only augments your pride, and their religious feeling your impiety. O

wicked race, how long will you deceive mankind!

Behold, O Italy, what manner of men are your priests, your ministers of

religion! They who ought to alleviate your woes and render your chains

less galling, whose duty it is to shed the balm of consolation on your

wounds, they, on the contrary, engender strife and disgust among you;

every hour they recall to your mind your past shame, your excessive

credulity, your blind adherence, your too great submission. They

pretend to lament over your illiberality, your religious incredulity,

only that they may the better devour your substance. They, rapacious

vultures, greedy wolves, they are the bad shepherds of whom the

Prophet speaks. God of Israel, God of our fathers, remember the promise

thou hast made through the mouth of thy servant, Jeremiah: "Woe be unto

the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the

Lord.... Behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings.... I

will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have

driven them, and will bring them again to their folds: ... And I will

set up shepherds over them who shall feed them: and they shall fear no

more, nor be dismayed.... Mine heart within me is broken because of the

prophets; ... because of swearing the land mourneth; ... their course

is evil, and their force is not right. For both prophet and priest are

profane; yea, in my house have I found their wickedness.... I will

bring evil upon them, the year of their visitation. I have seen folly

in the prophets of Samaria; ... also in the prophets of Jerusalem: ...

they are all unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.

Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts concerning the prophets; Behold,

I will feed them with wormwood, and make them chink the water of gall:

for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth into all

the land. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of

the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a

vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord....

In the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly. I have not sent

these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they

prophesied.... I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies

in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed.... Which think to

cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every

one to their neighbour, ... The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell

a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully.

What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord.... Therefore, behold,

I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my words....

Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, ... and do tell

them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness;

yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: ... Therefore, behold I, even

I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I

gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence: and I will

bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which

shall not he forgotten."[125]

_Letter to_ CARDINAL CARACCIOLO, _Archbishop of Naples_.

(Vide p. 237.)

Capua, August 27, 1835.

Eminentissimo e Reverendissimo Padrone,

THIS, my most respectful letter, will be presented by Father Giacinto

Achilli, a Doctor of the Dominican Order, who was lately proposed to me

as a preacher in the Metropolitan Church of Capua, by Father Jabalot,

the Master-General of the Order; to whom I applied for a serviceable

and talented person to occupy the pulpit during the period of Lent.

It would be difficult for me to express to your Eminence the

satisfaction that this same Dr. Achilli has given to the Clergy and to

the people. He has now fixed his residence in Naples, in the Monastery

of St. Peter the Martyr, which may be greatly benefited by his superior

talents in Philosophy, Mathematics, and Theology; all which sciences he

taught in Viterbo, his native place. He is desirous to place himself

under the protection of your Eminence, to whose exceeding kindness

I therefore venture to recommend him; more especially, as I know

the favour with which your Eminence regarded Doctor Salsano, also a

Dominican, on account of his singular talent and virtues; and it is to

be hoped, that Dr. Achilli, who is certainly in no wise inferior to

him, will prove himself equally agreeable to your Eminence. The Master

of the Sacred Palace, Buttaoni, whose learning is well known in Rome,

frequently consulted him in the revision of new publications, when he

was residing at the Minerva; from which circumstance, it is evident in

how high a degree of esteem he was held; and how worthy he is of the

favour of your Eminence.

I avail myself of the present opportunity to offer my humble duty and

respects, and most respectfully kissing your hands,

I remain,

Most Reverend Eminence,

Your most humble and devoted Servant,

F. CARD. SERRA, Archbishop of Capua.

The above letter, which is written with all the attention to etiquette

and ceremony that the Cardinals observe towards each other, may serve

as a model to those who wish to study the code of politeness received

in the Court of Rome.

LETTER.

(Vide p. 284.)

_Fr._ ANTONIO DI GESU, _formerly Pietro Leonini Pignotti of Rome, to

the General of the Order of Carmelite Friars at Rome, Health_.

SOME time ago you summoned me to Rome to give an account of my belief.

Nothing was ever more agreeable to me than your invitation, since I

have always desired to bear testimony to the truth. I should not have

hesitated in the least to obey you, if I had imagined that I could as

freely have confessed my opinions at Rome as I do at Malta. But at

Rome, as you well know, there are certain theologians, who for any

dissent expressed against their views, immediately raise the cry of

_heresy_, and conclude with Thomas Aquinas, "_that heretics should be

burned_." Willing, therefore, to spare myself any such proceedings as

you would, doubtless, have thought it necessary to put in force against

me, had I presented myself before you, I judge it best to give you no

other trouble than will accrue to you in examining my present belief,

such as I now hold it, and, with the help of God, hope to keep it to

the hour of my death.

I believe then all that God has revealed to us in his holy word, in

which he has clearly pointed out to us the way, the truth, and the life

we ought to follow, in order, through the assistance of Christ, to

enter into his kingdom. I consequently believe, with the true Catholic

Church, all that is taught in the Apostolic and the Nicene creeds.

I do not believe in the traditions of the Church of Rome, which are

altogether false, and fabricated for interested purposes, partly from

errors in the writings of the early fathers, and false interpretations

of Scripture, and partly from foolish superstitions, which are by the

Church called _pious_, although contrary to the spirit of the word of

God.

I believe that Jesus Christ instituted two Sacraments--Baptism, and

the Holy Supper: the first, when he said to the Apostles, "Go ye

therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the

Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" and the latter, when he

said, "This do in remembrance of me."

I do not believe that Jesus Christ ever instituted the sacrament of

confirmation, since he gave no commands respecting it. The imposition

of hands is a simple rite in imitation of what was done by the

apostles. Acts viii. 17. The anointing is entirely of Romish invention.

Neither is there any mention of auricular confession in the New

Testament. St. James exhorts the faithful to confess their sins to one

another, that is, to ask forgiveness of each other for mutual wrongs.

Of extreme unction not a word is said in the whole of the Bible.

Ordination is nothing more than a simple rite, a ceremony consisting

in the imposition of hands, praying God to give to his people good and

faithful ministers. And matrimony is merely a contract between the

parties, and the priest is enjoined to implore the Lord to bless the

union. These five last have by no means the same claim to be regarded

as sacraments as the two first. And even these two are altered and

injured by the Romish Church, since in baptism water alone should be

used, and not salt and oil; and in the Holy Supper common bread should

be used, as it was originally, and as it has always been in the true

Catholic Church.

I believe that original sin consists in the corruption of human nature

descending from Adam. I believe that justification is solely the work

of grace, without regard to works, as the Apostle teaches in his

Epistle to the Romans.

I do not believe that original sin consists in following Adam, as the

Pelagians say, and as the Church of Rome teaches; neither that it is

washed away by the water of baptism. Born as we all are to natural

life, we are re-born unto spiritual life "by water and the Holy

Spirit." Neither do I believe that our own works in any way contribute

to our justification, the works themselves being the effect of

justifying grace. Jesus Christ has not said that those who work will be

saved, but those who "believe and are baptized." And speaking of works,

he has declared that when we have done all that is commanded us, we are

to acknowledge that we are only "unprofitable servants."

I believe that Jesus Christ has once for all made propitiation for

our sins, in that one sacrifice, which was ordained for our eternal

redemption, he being a high priest for ever after the order of

Melchisedec.

I believe that any other sacrifice is false and deceitful; any other

propitiation is sacrilegious. Consequently, I deny the pretended

propitiatory sacrifice of the Romish Church, as impious and heretical,

contrary to the teaching of the Gospel, to the Epistles, and to the

doctrine and practice of the ancient Catholic Church.

I believe that in the Sacrament of the Holy Supper, Jesus Christ

communicates himself, through faith, to the believer, in the substance

of the bread and wine, in a real and spiritual manner, so that eating

that holy bread, and drinking of that sacred cup, with true faith, we

receive through the word of Christ, the resurrection and the life.

I do not believe that in this sacrament the substance of the bread and

wine disappears, and that of the actual body and blood of Christ is

substituted in its stead, as the Church of Rome teaches, in which she

follows the notion of the heretic Eutychus--"This _is_ my body," is to

be understood as "John _is_ Elias," and that passage in Exodus, "It

_is_ the Lord's passover." _Esti_ in the Greek signifies _represents_.

St. Luke explains the meaning in the following words, "This cup _is_

the New Testament in my blood." And in this sense alone the ancient

Church understood it.

I believe that the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ are

received, when the bread and wine are eaten and drank according to the

order and the warning of Christ, "Except ye eat the flesh of the son of

man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you."

I do not believe that in receiving one half alone, the whole sacrament

is received, it being indivisible according to the will of the Divine

institution, and was so understood in the Church for twelve centuries,

and continues still to be so in the most ancient Christian Church, that

of the Greeks.

I believe that, according to the Holy Scriptures, the souls of the dead

are forthwith consigned to their eternal destiny; the elect and the

justified to the joys of heaven; the wicked and the reprobate to the

abyss of perdition.

I do not believe in an intermediate or third place or state, between

heaven and hell. If purgatory exists at all, there is no reason why

it should not always have existed, and have been mentioned in the

Scriptures as well as heaven and hell. I do not believe that the

Almighty created it only in the fifth century of the Church, and

revealed it to St. Augustin alone, to become after the lapse of ten

centuries a dogma of faith.

I believe that the saints, who are known as such to God only, stand in

his presence, and together with the angels adore Christ and the majesty

of God.

I do not believe that the saints know anything about us, nor that they

can in any manner interfere in our concerns: certainly, we owe them no

worship, since like ourselves they are created beings; neither should

we invoke their aid, which they are unable to bestow. Jesus Christ,

says St. Paul, is our sole mediator; He continually intercedes on our

behalf with his divine Father, and exhorts us to come unto Him. His

mother, who in one solitary instance attempted to intercede at the

marriage feast of Cana, had for her sole answer, "Woman, what have I to

do with thee?" I do not believe that the reliques of saints are to be

worshipped, since God in his second commandment prohibits all worship

but to himself alone. Why has Rome hidden this commandment?

I believe it is right to hold the memory of the saints in due

estimation, and to place their portraits among those of our friends and

relatives.

I do not believe that any images, whether of Christ, of the Virgin,

or of any saint, ought ever to be worshipped, as an act especially

forbidden by God.

I believe that Jesus Christ has left to the Church the power which the

ministers exercise in public, to absolve,--that is, to declare that all

those are pardoned who believe in the satisfaction He has made, and who

humbly implore forgiveness.

I do not believe that Jesus Christ pardons in virtue of our works,

neither on account of the merits of his mother, or of the saints, none

of whom have a superabundance; and much less for the mere asking of the

Romish Church, in its notable discovery of indulgences.

I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ is the congregation of all

the faithful who are baptized, and who believe in neither more nor less

than what is taught in the Holy Scriptures, which Church is one, holy,

catholic, and apostolic, having Christ for its head. And I believe

that this Church exists separately, among the different languages and

nations, as in the time of the Apostles.

I do not believe that there is a mother Church superior to the rest,

having dominion and power over all others. And I am of opinion that

Rome, who arrogates to herself such dominion, has in reality no Church

at all; since God, who has destroyed the Latin language among the

people, has also, at the same time, destroyed the Church which existed

in that language, the people and the priests having become totally

separated through this difference of language; nor can the Church be

restored until it is regenerated.

I believe that the faith and the confession of the Apostle Peter is the

faith and confession of the true Church of Christ, the foundation and

the pillar of truth. I believe that this faith should be preserved pure

and intact among believers, who are bound to reject all innovations

which, through error or ignorance, are introduced into Christianity;

and that obedience is due to God and not to man.

I do not believe that the blessed Apostle Peter ever left any successor

either at Jerusalem or at Rome,--which latter city he probably never

visited. All true believers are his successors; and I believe it to be

a blasphemy that a miserable sinner like myself should dare to call

himself the Vicar of Jesus Christ,--his representative upon earth. I

do not believe that He has any need to be represented, since He, much

better than any man, or than the whole race of men, sees and provides

for the necessities of his Church. No obedience whatever should

therefore be paid to a man who impiously calls himself the successor of

St. Peter and the Vicar of Jesus Christ.

I believe that all the canon and other laws of Rome are contrary to the

spirit of the Gospel; that all the Councils and Synods, including that

of Trent, held in support of Rome, and favouring her interests, are

false and erroneous, and that their memory will always be a disgrace

to Christianity. I believe that of all the errors that have infested

the Church, the worst and the most detestable is that of Popery, as all

the articles I have thus far enumerated sufficiently demonstrate, and

against which, I, therefore, as a servant of God, and a minister of

Jesus Christ, loudly protest, and condemn.

I do not believe that any Christian can ever live tranquilly under a

system which is contrary to the Bible, whose doctrines are so many

heresies, and whose practice is impiety throughout. I do not believe

that any one who has heard and received the truth, can conscientiously

remain conjoined to those who are opposed to it. The least pardonable

sin is that of unfaithfulness.

I will conclude then in the same words by which you, professing the

most unworthy belief of Pius IV., deceive yourselves; in opposition to

which I have expressly modelled this my present profession of faith.

This true Catholic faith, out of which no man can be saved, and which

I now freely profess and truly hold, and which, by the blessing of

God, I hope to retain pure and undefiled to my last breath, I, Pietro

Leonini Pignotti, minister of the Italian Catholic Church, promise,

swear, and make oath, to uphold, declare, and preach, to the extent of

my ability, that it may also be received by those who are committed to

my charge. So help me God and his holy Evangelists. Amen.

REPLY TO THE ALLOCUTION OF PIUS IX.

_At the Consistory of Gaeta, held on the 20th April, 1849._

(Vide p. 312.)

SINCE you oblige us to reply to your address, we intend to make

it clearly evident to whom are to be attributed "_the disastrous

storms_," _which_, you tell us, "_overwhelm your State, and plunge

the whole of Italy into confusion and disorder_." Not to insist upon

the fact, that the State properly belongs to us the people, and not

to you, a repudiated monarch, we shall offer our remarks, not to your

colleagues of the Consistory, whose opinions we value not, but to our

own brethren, our fellow-countrymen, who share with us in the affection

and interest for the public weal; so that no one may be ignorant how

much and to what end we have laboured. "_And may the Almighty_," (we

use your own words,) "_grant that men, made wiser by these most unhappy

events, understand that they cannot occasion a greater injury to

themselves than by deviating from the paths of truth, of justice, of

honour, and of religion_." If you suffered yourself "_to be led away

by the wicked counsel of evil men; and to learn of them to deceive and

to ensnare, we, on the contrary, shall make evident to the whole world

with what care and solicitude and brotherly love we have endeavoured

to promote the real good, the tranquillity, and the prosperity of the

people_," our brethren, no longer your subjects, in our Republic, which

you obstinately persist in calling "_your Pontifical State_;" _and

which_ is most truly "_the fruit of our great care and affection. In

these words we condemn not only yourself, but all those most deceitful

workers of such great evils, attributing to every one his proper

share._"

And here, above all, it delights our minds that "_many of our people,

aware of having been miserably deceived by you, have now closed their

ears to your words and to your counsels, and opened them_," instead,

to the righteous doctrines of the friends of the people, of the holy

evangelists, who, pointing out "_the right path of virtue, and treading

in the ways of honour and justice_, aim alone at encouraging the mind,

_and directing the understanding in the pursuit of truth_."

All are at present aware of your utter deceitfulness, and constant

disregard to truth; and they cite, as the first proof of it, your

famous amnesty, on account of which, with unparalleled effrontery, you

so often reproach us, and which you pretended was to restore peace to

so many families, including, be it remembered, your own, and those

of your relations. And we, at first, gave credit to your assertions,

wondering that a pope could do so much. But to our extreme surprise we

discovered that our names were secretly handed over to the Austrian

police of Italy, that our persons might be under surveillance. And

among the exiles who received the amnesty, there were many to whom your

consuls refused passports to return to their homes; while others had to

undergo such humiliating treatment, that many chose rather to remain in

exile than purchase a degraded freedom at such a price.

It naturally followed that those who returned did not consider

themselves under great obligation to you, individually, but felt

themselves more and more confirmed in the necessity of getting rid of

your race altogether, as a race that never forgives.

"_It grieved you_" to see the people meet in assemblies, from which

issued the sparks of a fire you had attempted to cover over with ashes;

but which the more you endeavoured to extinguish it, the more it fed

itself and flamed forth; neither did the Edict of the Secretary of

State, in April, 1847, produce any other effect than to make evident

your own apprehension and that of your government, concerning matters

which had no other aim than to protect a people against the artifices

and the control of him, who, from the first, intended, after having

granted them a moment's relief, to oppress them afresh. It was very

natural that your endeavour should be resisted, and that the people

who had roused themselves from their lethargy, should not suffer

themselves to be cast into it again. A vigilant people will not remain

inert. To you, who feign to be ignorant of its most heavy grievances,

it has spoken and it has written. Why then did you not listen to it?

You complain of its language and its threats! It is the genius of a

southern race to be resentful; towards those who turn a deaf ear to our

complaints we feel anger, and to the restive beast we are accustomed to

use the whip. You have a peculiar faculty in playing the deaf and the

restive, and we very naturally apply to it the treatment it deserves.

According to your account the conspiracy of July, 1847, was not a real

one, "_but contrived for the express purpose, by public agitators_."

And pray did you make this notable discovery at Gaeta? Is it not

true that when you showed some intention towards useful reform, the

adherents of the government of your predecessor, those men of vengeance

and of blood, who had filled the prisons and crowded the scaffold with

their innocent victims,--those men with whom to love their country and

to praise the sacred name of Italy, was a crime;--is it not true that

they conspired to our injury and against yourself? And was it not the

object of this conspiracy "_to plunge the City of Rome into civil war,

with slaughter and destruction; until the new institutes being entirely

abolished and done away with, the ancient form of government should be

restored_?" Whence arises then your present madness, to deny a fact

which you had full proof of, and which you yourself admitted at the

time? Is it true then no longer? And have these conspirators, because

they have paid court to you at Gaeta, suddenly become "_patterns

of goodness, eminent for their religion, and distinguished for

ecclesiastical dignity_?" Since you have remained out of Rome, how dear

they have become to you. It was well for them that you quitted it, and

it is through them that you will never more return.[126]

"_It was_," as you say, "in this time of agitation _that it was

proposed to form a Civic Guard_." We know full well with what jealous

eyes you look upon this institution--what a dagger it is in your heart.

"_Hastily assembled by your own act_," it was after your departure only

that "_it was completely organized and disciplined_." If you could now

behold this Guard which has received the title of National, you would

be compelled to acknowledge it the finest spectacle that Rome affords.

It is to this body we owe the tranquillity and good order which never

existed before. It defends our country against the aggression of your

satellites. It is composed of the flower of our citizens, and has

exulted in the cry, _Vivà la Repubblica, à basso il Papato_."

Do you not blush at the remembrance of that solemn piece of deceit

which you termed a Council of State? Was it not natural for us to

imagine that in this Council the will of the majority should prevail

over that of the minority? that the influence of the people was to

be equal to that of the priests? that yourself, a single individual,

and by no means infallible, might have the courtesy to submit your

individual opinion to that of the many? Otherwise, for what purpose is

the Council assembled?--to cause us to undergo the usual humiliation of

finding laws imposed upon us in opposition to our own wishes?

As to your glorious Allocution in the Consistory of Oct. 1847, of which

you still make boast, we shall leave those to judge who have read

the production. For us it was as an apple of discord, thrown among

the people of Italy, in order that they might mutually distrust each

other, and that all might withdraw themselves from the holy cause of

emancipating their common country. And that was no dream of an armed

foreign intervention secretly invited and even implored for, by a

conspiracy of cardinals and the monarch, to root out, as they said,

every germ of what they were pleased to call sedition. And were not

you, who, in February, 1843, spoke deceitful words of comfort in order

to tranquillize men's minds,--were not you foremost in this demand?

Still we continued to deceive ourselves: many persevered in their

opinion that you were good and liberal, and every day expected to see

civil and progressive institutions emanating from your decrees; the

Romans, still devoted to you, were willing to ascribe every delay,

every retrograde movement, every deceitful promise, to the intrigues

of evil-minded persons, and to believe that the Jesuits, who were most

assiduous about your court, prevented the expansion of your bounty.

It was through affection for yourself that we called out for their

suppression. Already expelled from other Italian States, why should

they continue to hold sway in Rome, where you yourself contributed to

render them the more odious? It was not, therefore, so much personal

hatred towards them, as love towards our country and yourself, that

induced the Romans to rise against the abhorred sons of Loyola. A proof

of this is, that not one of them was ill-treated, or even prevented

from remaining in the city, provided he kept himself quiet and

unobtrusive.

The removal of the Jesuits was so far beneficial, that on the 14th

March, a Statute was issued which appeared to us to regard our

necessities, and to give evidence of your surpassing liberality. It

was read with avidity, and we asked ourselves if the government had

really become constitutional. Many reports were spread. The more

credulous were transported with extravagant enthusiastic delight; the

more sagacious, before they gave way to hope, required time, to see

the fulfilment of the promise; long, and sad experience had taught

them to distrust the specious professions of a pope. With sincerity

and right feeling you might have conducted us to a Republic, but such

was not accordant to your character nor to the innate genius of your

caste. A republic to be proclaimed by a pope in his own States, would

be as impossible as for the devil to turn Christian. You were right,

therefore, to exclaim against those who, to tell you what they had

fondly dreamed, broke in upon your slumbers, with so little ceremony.

You too have had your dream, conjured up through an association of

ideas very different from theirs, which you have confided not to their

ears alone, but to the hearing of the public at large, when you state

that the Republic they wished for "had no other _object in view than

perpetual agitation, the removal of every principle of justice, virtue,

honour, and religion; and to introduce and spread abroad on every side,

with loss and ruin to all human society, the fatal and horrible system

of Socialism, contrary to all natural right and reason_."

This was an ugly dream, and, doubtless, arose from a diseased

imagination. But that was no dream which you have since related to us

with such satisfaction, how you had, to our injury, opposed the Italian

cause, secretly at first, and afterwards more openly. Our youth who

flew to arms in the righteous cause, assured you of their intention to

seek the sanguinary Croat, where the battle raged the fiercest. And you

feigned to approve of their holy design, blessing their banners, and

auguring from heaven itself auspicious omens for their victory. Was it

not you who expressed to Charles Albert your grief that you could not

assist him as you wished? And when was it that Rome discovered your

real intentions, and your secret orders not to pass the confines, if

not when they heard from your own lips your celebrated Allocution of

the 29th April, 1848? Bitter remembrance of an act that destroyed all

the hopes of a people, at that time, devoted to you! It is evident,

then, that your love for the Italian cause, and all your speeches and

professions, were priestly and royal deception. And you dare bring to

our recollection those times in the past and the present year; when,

in the former, you abhorred to shed the blood of the Croat, and in the

latter you thirsted for that of the Romans!

On the 29th of April last, the army of Louis Buonaparte displayed

itself beneath the walls of Rome, with a direful train of artillery,

of cannon and of bombs, to slaughter in your name all those Romans who

should maintain that you, a Christian prelate, ought not to govern them

as king. A fatal day was that for Rome; the most disastrous in our

annals; the most disgraceful to the Papacy!

Since matters are in this state, strike out from your Allocution words

that you have no right to utter: "_that you, elevated, although most

unworthily_," (most true,) "_through the inscrutable decree of Divine

Providence, to the summit of apostolic dignity, to exercise upon

earth the office of Vicar to Jesus Christ_," (a false and blasphemous

assertion,) "_you receive from God, the fountain of Charity and Love,

your mission to regard with paternal affection, all mankind, of

whatever country or race, to watch over and to promote their safety,

and not to impel them to slaughter and to death_." That these words

are false is evident from your own confession that you have yourself

brought and impelled against us, in fratricidal war, Austria, France,

Spain, and a portion of Italy.

To whom are to be attributed the slaughters at Bologna, at Ancona,

and beneath the walls at Rome? You were averse to a just war, for the

safety of Italy; not so to that most unjust one which had for its

object the replacing of yourself, the most abhorred of sovereigns, upon

a throne which you had yourself deserted, and from which, "_through

the inscrutable decree of Divine Providence_," rather than through any

effort of ours, you had been removed.

Who will pardon your mis-statement of facts, your outrage upon

individuals? Language has no words more abusive or scornful than those

you have employed against us, who, you assert, are guilty of the heavy

offence of despoiling you of your territory, and that, too, after

having constrained you in so many ways to grant a reform which was

true, stable, and conformable to our wants. But it is not the empty

name of a republic that satisfies us; it is a wise, a provident, and

a just government, that we require. Call our present one what you

will; it is that which we have always wished for, and to which we

have a just right. It is one which we endeavoured to urge upon you,

because the Papal Government removed you too far from us. Some who

fancied you a wise and considerate prince, believed your influence

might be beneficial, and without delay proposed that you should rule

the destinies of Italy. You, however, it appears, considered this

proposition _as extremely insulting_. In fact, it was not from a pope

that Italy could hope for her redemption. The popes, at the head even

of a republic, would have finished by subjecting the whole of the

country, as they did at Rome, where the Church became the incubus of

the State, although at one time denominated a republic,--_Sancta Dei

Ecclesia et Respublica Romanorum_.

This attempt, then, having been made as a last proof of devotion

towards your person, it was inevitably forced upon our conviction that

no other hope remained for us than what might arise from the separation

of the priestly and royal functions. The Church was to be the sole

empire for the priests; Rome and Italy would together arrange a form

of government for themselves. But this simple act, full of justice

and moderation, you stigmatise as the fruit of "_the most unbridled

licentiousness, audacity, and depravity_," and they who are actuated by

love for their country and mankind are stigmatised by you as "_enemies

both of God and man_." ...

How entirely has the spirit of falsehood possessed you! When have "_the

streets_" as you say, "_been sprinkled with human blood_?" when have

"_the most deplorable sacrileges taken place, and the most outrageous

violence been offered to your person in your own house_?" What infamy

for the Head of our Church to be guilty of such scandalous untruths!

You declare also that "_traitors, infuriated, and threatening, indulged

in all sorts of deceit and violence to terrify the good, already

sufficiently intimidated_." We ask you, Who were these traitors, and

when were these intimidations employed? All the world knows that you

were not yourself more legally chosen pope, than the Constituent

Government was authorized by the whole of the Roman people, in fair and

unbiassed freedom of election....

The love of empire, that sways the base and ignoble mind, is more

present with you than the love of the people or a regard for humanity.

It is in vain you endeavour to hide it; nevertheless, it is ridiculous

in our days to talk of a temporal throne in the apostolic seat, in the

Holy Roman Church. The Apostles possessed none, and could consequently

give no right to inherit any. The words of our Divine Master are

moreover in direct opposition to such possession, enjoining them to

arrogate to themselves no titles of authority. "After these things do

the Gentiles seek;" "but be ye not like them;" and many more passages

might be adduced to the same effect....

If, however, it be alleged that our progenitors gave to the High-Priest

of Rome the office of governor, we, by the same right, have power to

take it away. In like manner, the sister Churches of France, Austria,

and Spain, may, if they choose, make either a king, an emperor, or a

president, of their chief-priest. We have no right to object to their

doing so, and all we ask in return is that they should not trouble

their heads about us.

Your dethronement was occasioned by your ill-government and oppression,

in which you followed the example of other despots; and moreover,

you did so in the name of St. Peter, and even of Christ. And all the

temporal power and trust you placed in the hands of the clergy, a

measure injurious alike to the interests of the Church and of the

people. The most talented were employed in the service of the State,

the most ignorant in that of the Church; the former were active and

rapacious in acquiring wealth, and the latter supine and superstitious

in the duties of their calling; the one party rolling in luxury, and

the other poor and needy, so that by degrees they began mutually to

hate each other.

This monstrous union of Church and State has thus gone on until

the present period. Profane and sacred things have been so jumbled

together that good sense and right feeling with respect to them have

altogether been lost. The progress of civilization on every side except

among ourselves, rendered our situation still less endurable, so that

among all classes the two powers were held in slight and derision. In

proportion as they ceased to love the prince they began to despise the

priest. By the one the laws were transgressed, by the other the offices

of religion neglected. The sovereign laid his snares, and the priest

through his negligence brought the Church into discredit. Meanwhile,

the obstinacy of the popes, to keep the two powers united in their

own person, threatened them not only with the loss of the State, but

of the Church also. It was, therefore, a kindliness towards yourself,

and a love for religion, that induced us to decree, that in order to

guarantee the Roman pontiff in the free exercise of his spiritual

power he should no longer wield the temporal sceptre. It is necessary

when the whole body is threatened with gangrene to cut off the morbid

portion....

We ardently desire to see established the religion of Christ, as holy

and saving, and this, we conceive, may exist without bishops or

priests;--the invisible and universal Church, which includes believers

in all parts of the world; of which Christ alone is high-priest and

Head. And this invisible Church does not do away with a visible and

material one, which is divided among all people and nations, and of

which every one has a right to choose that form which appears to him

the best. Many of these Churches have no bishops, as the German, the

Scotch, the Helvetic, and the evangelical Churches of France and Italy.

Who is the bishop of the Church of the Waldenses? No one. And yet it is

full of zeal, has existed from the eleventh century, and after so many

fierce persecutions and massacres still presents a body of twenty-four

thousand believers.

It is possible, then, to be good Christians, and to form a visible

national Church on such a model without the aid of bishops. At any

rate, you cannot deny that a Church can change its bishop for a

sufficient cause. Do you think it then absurd or contrary to the

precepts of the gospel that the people of Rome, who may be termed the

whole Romish Church, should repudiate you as an apostate-bishop, a

traitor, a bombarder, and that they should elect another, faithful,

true, and beneficent?

Those who were asleep have now awakened, and they no longer trust your

words. When you went out from Rome, the Bible entered in; the Bible,

persecuted by the popes! and the gospel of Christ and the holy writings

of the Apostles, faithfully translated into the Italian language, are

now in the hands of the people, who read them, and find there neither

popery nor the pope.

Take care that it does not happen to yourself in Italy, as it happened

to your predecessors out of it, who, desirous to obtain more, lost all.

They who last February took from you the temporal power, intended by

so doing to guarantee and ameliorate your spiritual authority. From

the 30th April to the present period, you have rejected every friendly

advance, and violated every law in presenting yourself before the walls

of Rome, surrounded by bayonets and cannon; and you announced to this

city your return and your solemn entry with bomb-shells and incendiary

acts among the wounded and the dying. Is this the entry of a bishop? Is

it in such a manner that the pretended Vicar of Jesus Christ returns to

his people?...

Let us suppose, by way of argument, that you, environed by thousands of

bayonets, should effect your return to a city overpowered by foreign

violence, what would you find at Rome?--a people capable of loving you

and serving you as formerly? No, indeed; you would find a desert. The

city which has abhorred you as a prince, and through you has learned

to despise the whole race from which the popes have descended, is no

longer disposed to receive your laws, to pay you tribute. Over whom do

you expect to reign? Over the few who followed you to Gaëta? or those

who here and there have remained favourable to the old system? Even of

these there are none that really love you; it is to the system, and not

to yourself personally, that they are attached....

It is in vain you exaggerate the disorders of our government, and in

disgraceful language descend to the lowest scurrilities, calling Rome

"_a den of furious beasts_" and those who dwell there "_apostates,

heretics, communists, and socialists--bent on disseminating their

pestiferous doctrines, and corrupting every heart, and possessed with

a daring and sacrilegious desire of seizing upon the property and

revenues of the Church_." If this property and these revenues belong,

as you say, to the Church, then we have done no other than restore

them to their rightful owner, rescuing them from the hands of lawless

spoilers. The people constitute the Church; the property of the Church

then is the property of the people. And the priests and bishops,

considered as servants to the Church, are to be maintained by the

people. By divine command the tribe of Levi was supported by the other

tribes. Christ also directs that the ministers of his Gospel are to be

maintained by the faithful, when he says, "for the labourer is worthy

of his hire." This was the practice in the early times of Christianity,

and to them we must return. If our former ministers are content to

return to the Church under this new arrangement, we are willing once

more to receive them; otherwise, we must look out for servants who will

be more zealous for heavenly riches, and less greedy after the wealth

of this world.

Is it because these doctrines have been established for more than

eighteen centuries, and are based on the Gospel and the writings of the

Apostles, that you call those who profess them _apostates and heretics_?

We have "_despoiled the temples of their ornaments_!" That is, we have

taken their superfluous silver to coin into money, to supply the place

of that which you and yours have concealed or carried away. We have

"_turned religious houses to profane uses_!" Yes; some of the haunts

of the lazy and the worthless we have given as habitations for the

industrious poor, who live as God has commanded them to do, by the

sweat of their brow. In the eyes of those to whom idleness is sacred

and labour profane, we have certainly committed a crime, but for us

_heretics and apostates_, we imagine we have done a holy work.

We have ill treated "_the sacred virgins_!" The chronicle does not say

so. They have never been more safe and more respected than by ourselves

and our government. Who it was that ill treated the sacred virgins

under your own government, is well known to you, without our taking the

trouble to repeat it. Pay a little more regard to truth, and be silent

on these matters, unless you wish us to reveal what for the sake of

charity we do not mention.

We have "_most cruelly persecuted, imprisoned, and put to death the

most worthy and excellent ecclesiastics and holy monks; venerable and

esteemed bishops, even such as were elevated to the degree of Cardinal,

we have barbarously driven from their flocks, and thrust into prison_!"

You accuse us of what, for reasons of state, we ought to have done, but

which, through too great consideration, we abstained from doing. All

wicked and insidious traitors, spies and conspirators, whether priests,

monks, bishops, or cardinals, who sought to bring ruin upon the people,

we ought undoubtedly to have hanged, in reward for their infamy. That

we did not do so was, perhaps, through an overweening regard for their

persons. Pope Gregory, and his cardinal, Lambruschini, on the slightest

suspicion of liberalism, tore from the bosom of their families citizens

far more useful and respectable than these priests and monks, consigned

them to horrible dungeons, or after a mock trial, handed them over

to the public executioner. All the vengeance we took, was, on the

commencement of our revolution, to pardon all those accursed wretches

who did not die with Pope Gregory; and our government calmed the fury

of the populace, who, on account of their crimes, were eager for their

destruction. It was a grief to us when some of those who had received

pardon at our hands again sought to irritate the people, who then knew

themselves to be masters. Certain death would have been their fate had

not our government shut them up in confinement.

Certainly, when any one was taken with arms in his hands, and firing

upon our people, as the curate of Monte Mario, the priest Racchetti,

and another or two were, the people conceived they had a perfect right

to take the law into their own hands, and get rid of their enemies,

without writing to you to ask leave to do so. You may thank Providence

that our people are so mild and so obedient to their governors as they

are, or you would have had some of your monasteries visited, and the

ribald monks turned out to pay you a visit at Gäeta. In the provinces

likewise, every here and there, a band of factious insurgents roamed

about, headed by a priest or a monk, and protected by a bishop or a

cardinal. Was it not an unheard-of act of mercy to spare the lives of

such wretches? And is it on account of such acts that you complain of

the Republican government?

We felt an extreme repugnance, which the government of the priests

never felt, to shed the blood of the citizens, considering them not in

the light of subjects, but as brethren. And we grieve that all do not

share with us in these fraternal feelings.

As to the _exhausted treasury_, to whom was it owing, if not to

yourselves? We, on the contrary, in a short space of time, restored the

finances, and put the administration of them into the best possible

order. Who paralysed the exertions of commerce, and with unjust laws

and enormous duties forced all the capital of the provinces to the

seat of government? Who, on the other hand, reformed the laws, reduced

the duties, and gave encouragement to commerce, if not the Republic?

Certainly, commerce greatly suffered, and still continues to do so,

in consequence of the siege and bombardment, by your favourites, of

Bologna, Ancona, and Rome.

What falsehoods you state with respect to "_heavy contributions imposed

upon the nobility, property plundered from individuals_!" Many of the

nobility never contributed a single farthing, whilst many, not noble,

paid large sums into the treasury. Is it not yourselves who teach that

the superfluity of the rich is the patrimony of the poor? But who was

ever plundered by us? Can you bring a single example to justify your

assertion? If not, we have a right to stigmatize you as a calumniator.

Neither can you bring any proof of your other most injurious assertion,

that we "_interfered with the personal liberty of all good people,

destroying their peace, and even threatening their very lives with

the dagger of the assassin_." The audacious nature of this falsehood

is apparent. Have we not abundant testimony of the good character and

conduct of our government, from persons of every nation, from the

representatives of foreign powers, who are ready to certify that none

of these excesses were ever perpetrated under the Roman Republic? How

frequently they took place under the government of the popes, I need

not relate; how many innocent individuals were torn from the bosom of

their families, how many lives sacrificed, it were painful to disclose.

The reign of the late Gregory furnished numberless examples, and your

own reign, too, is not without its share in these enormities.

Let us now advert to that glorious confession of yours, of having

sought from foreign powers an armed intervention to replace you on

that throne from which you were removed more through your own weakness

and folly than through any act of ours: and which you have had the

simplicity to publish, in order, as it seems, that history may hand

down to posterity this last ignominy of the papacy. Four foreign armies

were invited to Rome to place the last of the popes upon a throne which

is renowned for having the early pages in its history marked by fraud

and usurpation; the succeeding ones by extortions, deceits, civil wars,

the barbarities of the Croats, and the horrors of the Inquisition;

and the last with the destruction of liberty, with parricide, and the

bombardment of Rome, the great act on which you pride yourself. Do

you, then, imagine it possible that you can return to fill a throne,

so abhorred by Rome, and by all Italy? It is only possible through the

support of foreign armies, bayonets, cannon, and all warlike means!

It is only to be effected by the shedding of blood, and slaughter of

thousands sacrificed to sacerdotal fury and ambition! Can you return

to Rome to hear the cries of mothers, deprived by you of their dearest

hopes, of widows whose husbands have been slain through your agency?

And in the midst of such universal grief will you return smiling and

joyful? How long, John Mastai, will you continue to insult our country,

and how long is she to endure your presence? The presence of one who

has allied himself with kings to betray the people, who united in

friendship with the Bourbon of Naples, in order to devise the best

means of oppressing every generous mind, of eradicating from the sons

of Italy every noble sentiment! O insensate men that we were, to

believe you, to trust in your deceitful promises, to the disappointment

of your hopes, to the ruin of our happiness! Do you not believe that

the Almighty is the judge of our cause; that he is powerful to abase

the rich and the proud, and to exalt the poor and the oppressed? If you

make an appeal to the canonical laws, we refer to those of the Gospel.

Christ has taught us to bless those who curse us, to do good to

those who hate us, and to pray for those who despitefully use us and

persecute us. But you begin to curse those who have always blessed

you, to hate those who have done good to you, and to persecute those

who have prayed for you. You who alone could have preserved the

country, and have restored what was lost, joined yourself to our

enemies to ruin and destroy us.

And you dare to call yourself the Vicar of Christ! Is Christ then

divided? is there a Christ opposed to the gospel? If so, you doubtless

are his Vicar, and we have nothing more in common with you; neither the

country which you have betrayed, nor the faith which you have denied.

Keep possession of your Church; it is no longer ours: and enjoy your

kingdom, since we are no longer your subjects. Go where your wishes

lead you; but dare not again to place foot in a city which accuses,

judges, and condemns you. Who could endure to raise their eyes to

encounter those of a traitor? Who could receive a benediction from a

hand yet stained with blood? No one, indeed, could consent to enter

the temple with a hypocrite, who at the very time he was planning by

the basest means to wreak upon us his cruel vengeance with fire and

slaughter, had the assurance to give breath to the following words,

which, to undeceive the present and to warn the future generation,

not without a sensation of extreme horror and disgust, we venture to

repeat;--

"_Lastly, venerable brethren, resigning ourselves entirely to the

inscrutable decrees of the wisdom of God, with which he operates his

glory, while in the humility of our heart we render Him infinite thanks

for having made us worthy of so great suffering for the name of Jesus,

and for having rendered us, in a degree, similar to Himself in His

passion, we are ready in faith, hope, patience, and in gentleness,

to suffer the most severe pains and trials, and, for the sake of the

Church, to give even our very life, if by the shedding of our blood her

calamities could be remedied._"

Such impudence of declamation amid such atrocious deeds, for ever

closes the page whereon, in characters of blood, is registered the

perpetual downfall of the Roman Pontificate.

FINIS.

R. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILL.

FOOTNOTES:

[125] Jer. xxiii.

[126] Unhappily, this prediction has not been verified.

New Edition, in fcap. 8vo. cloth, price 6_s._

LECTURES FOR THE TIMES:

OR,

ILLUSTRATIONS AND REFUTATIONS

OF

THE ERRORS OF ROMANISM AND TRACTARIANISM.

BY THE

REV. JOHN CUMMING, D.D.

CONTENTS.

1. THE TEACHING OF CARDINAL WISEMAN.

2. CARDINAL WISEMAN: "HIS OATH AND ITS OBLIGATIONS." Two Lectures

delivered in the Hanover Square Rooms, in November 1850.

3. WHAT IS POPERY?

4. IS TRACTARIANISM POPERY?

5. ROMISH PLAUSIBLE PRETENSIONS.

6. APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

7. THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH.

8. THE FATHERS.

9. THE NICENE CREED.

10. THE BIBLE, NOT TRADITION.

11. THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS.

12. TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

13. THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

14. PURGATORY.

NOTICES OF THE WORK.

"In these Lectures Dr. Cumming gives the fullest scope to all his high

powers. Careful research, acute argument, brilliant illustration,

graphic description, eloquent appeal, all unite in enriching and

embellishing his pages, alluring the most indifferent to read,

and compelling the most prejudiced against his views to pause and

consider."--_Edinburgh Ecclesiastical Review._

"Dr. Cumming exhibits an extensive knowledge of the subject, great

powers of reasoning, and a wish to proceed to a right conclusion. The

volume is both interesting and instructive, and it unquestionably deals

with matters of the highest importance, in which all mankind are deeply

and permanently interested."--_Newcastle Courant._

"These Lectures embrace the most prominent errors of Romanism; and

we need not add that the subjects are discussed with ability, and

the victory over Popish misrepresentation complete."--_Edinburgh

Advertiser._

"Happy specimens of eloquence. It meets most of the difficulties

suggested by Romanists and sceptics, and may be regarded as a suitable

work to be placed in the hands of those who are wavering on the brink

of error, and will be hailed as such by all lovers of Protestant

truth."--_Kitto's Journal._

ARTHUR HALL, VIRTUE & CO. 25, PATERNOSTER ROW.

* * * * * *

Transcriber's note:

Variable spelling and hyphenation have been retained. Minor punctuation

inconsistencies have been silently corrected.

Two instances of unpaired double quotation marks could not be corrected.

Corrections:

The first line indicates the original, the second the correction.

p. 17:

to maintain such a sytsem,

to maintain such a system,

p. 55:

no compassion fom the servants of God

no compassion from the servants of God

p. 61:

with a little more secresy

with a little more secrecy

p. 64:

to ask of her her name,

to ask of her name,

p. 71:

in saving my honour and my consience

in saving my honour and my conscience

p. 85:

owed its origin to Guiseppe Calassanzio.

owed its origin to Giuseppe Calassanzio.

p. 94:

what part her enemy asailed her.

what part her enemy assailed her.

p. 130:

from the bishop, the _Prelator Governatore_,

from the bishop, the _Prelato Governatore_,

p. 131:

The Cardinal Camberini, to whom

The Cardinal Gamberini, to whom

p. 140:

and the most perfect familarity

and the most perfect familiarity

p. 185:

the popish sanhedrim

the popish sanhedrin

p. 190:

"No, my friend," repled Parchetti

"No, my friend," replied Parchetti

p. 234:

that you will acknowlege

that you will acknowledge

alone to the the see of the Ionian Islands

alone to the see of the Ionian Islands

p. 280:

are not subject to ths pains

are not subject to the pains

p. 366:

But are you not aware that it it is

But are you not aware that it is

p. 387:

what do we see around us? Infifidelity

what do we see around us? Infidelity

p. 394:

public buring of fifty thousand Moors

public burning of fifty thousand Moors

p. 400:

every hour they recal to your mind

every hour they recall to your mind

p. 421:

the perpetual downfal of the Roman Pontificate.

the perpetual downfall of the Roman Pontificate.

p. 422:

and compelling the most prejudiced againt his views

and compelling the most prejudiced against his views